First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Unknown

Anonymous Proxy

#1 Dec 31, 2012
Hebrews 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."

The writer of Hebrews makes a distinction between 'God' and 'Jesus'. God states, having brought His firstborn into the world, the angelic host must now worship the Son of God.

In Trinitarian thought the Son is God. If the angels have always worshiped God why would God command the angels to worship His Son? Logic would dictate that they have always been worshipping the Son. Wouldn't it only make sense to command someone to do something if they were not already doing it?

Trinitarian Logic:

The Son is God → Angels worship God → Son brought into the world → God commands angels to worship Son.

This system of thought doesn't make and chronological sense.

Thoughts?
Unknown

Anonymous Proxy

#2 Dec 31, 2012
Trinitarian Logic:

The Son is God ---> Angels worship God ---> Son brought into the world ---> God commands angels to worship Son.
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#3 Dec 31, 2012
Unknown wrote:
Hebrews 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
The writer of Hebrews makes a distinction between 'God' and 'Jesus'. God states, having brought His firstborn into the world, the angelic host must now worship the Son of God.
In Trinitarian thought the Son is God. If the angels have always worshiped God why would God command the angels to worship His Son? Logic would dictate that they have always been worshipping the Son. Wouldn't it only make sense to command someone to do something if they were not already doing it?
Trinitarian Logic:
The Son is God → Angels worship God → Son brought into the world → God commands angels to worship Son.
This system of thought doesn't make and chronological sense.
Thoughts?
I agree with your logic Unknown!

Shalom!

“JWs PREACH LIES!”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#4 Dec 31, 2012
This is cult logic.

As we all know from scripture, Phil 2:6-8 says that Christ was “existing in God’s form” before he became a man, and willingly “emptied (lowered) himself” to become a man and “humbled HIMSELF” in order to make himself subject to the Father.

Since the status changed at birth, it's no surprise that Angels were told to worship Jesus.

BTW, Jesus is God and you cannot receive salvation unless you pray to Jesus.

“Is that the best you can do?”

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#5 Dec 31, 2012
This scripture shows that Jesus is to be worshiped according to the bible.

That is contrary to JW belief.
MATT13WEEDHACKER

Wellington, New Zealand

#6 Dec 31, 2012
J F Rutherford wrote:
This is cult logic.
As we all know from scripture, Phil 2:6-8 says that Christ was “existing in God’s form” before he became a man, and willingly “emptied (lowered) himself” to become a man and “humbled HIMSELF” in order to make himself subject to the Father.
Since the status changed at birth, it's no surprise that Angels were told to worship Jesus.
BTW, Jesus is God and you cannot receive salvation unless you pray to Jesus.
This is to who's glory?

What does the Scripture say?

Philippians 2:11:

"...( TO )- the glory of the Son..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God the Son..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of the Son and the Father..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God the Son and God the Father..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God, the Son and the Father and the Holy Spirit..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God, the Son and ( to ) the Father and ( to ) the Holy Spirit..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God the Holy Spirit..."?

"...( TO )- the glory of God the Holy Trinity, God the Son, and ( to ) God the Father, and ( to ) God the Holy Spirit ( together ) into the ages. Amen..."?

Hmmm.

I'm not seeing that in my Bible.

Is it in yours?

Perhaps if I put on some stained glass tinted spectles, I might ( IMAGINE ) I see it!

What does the Scripture actually say?

"...( TO )..." - what does that mean?

Do you really know Tri{3}nitarians?

"...THE GLORY ( OF )..." - what does that mean?

Do you really know and understand Tri{3}nitarians?

What do those two things together:

1.) "...( TO )..."

And

2.) "...( OF )..."

What does that imply/say straight forwardly and mean in simple uncomplicated English?

Another question to think deeply about!

Who is identified as: "...GOD..."?

Who recieves the glory, and to whom is it directed?

What do the Scriptures say?
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#7 Dec 31, 2012
“Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Messiah Yahushua, who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore also God highly exalted him, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Yahushua Messiah is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”(Philippians 2:5-11 NASB).
MATT13WEEDHACKER

Wellington, New Zealand

#8 Dec 31, 2012
Unknown wrote:
Hebrews 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
The writer of Hebrews makes a distinction between 'God' and 'Jesus'. God states, having brought His firstborn into the world, the angelic host must now worship the Son of God.
In Trinitarian thought the Son is God. If the angels have always worshiped God why would God command the angels to worship His Son? Logic would dictate that they have always been worshipping the Son. Wouldn't it only make sense to command someone to do something if they were not already doing it?
Trinitarian Logic:
The Son is God → Angels worship God → Son brought into the world → God commands angels to worship Son.
This system of thought doesn't make and chronological sense.
Thoughts?
By the way UNKNOWN is right.

Hebrew 1:6:

Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )= aorist, active,( imperative ), middle, third person, plural

The "...imperative..." mood generally denotes a command!
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#9 Dec 31, 2012
In Philippians 2:6, Paul writes that Messiah Yahushua was “in the form of God,” as many English versions render the Greek expression en morphe theou. This phrase has given rise to the claim that Yahushua is “very God of very God,” as declared in the Nicene Creed, the ancient and first official formulation of the Trinitarian faith. According to this faith, Messiah is “co-equal, co-eternal, and consubstantial” with the Father, the “second person” of the Trinity. This means that Yahushua is really and truly God in every sense, apart from his being also man born of woman. All of this is declared to be a “mystery” which must be accepted by faith, under pain of excommunication or — in past centuries — death.
The investigator who has already been convinced by Yahushuas’ words in John 17:3 that the Father is “the only true God” and by his testimony to the Samaritan woman that the Jews were correct in their doctrine of God (John 4:21, 22)— a doctrine which left no room for anything but the absolute ONENESS of God — is puzzled by this insistence on viewing God as “three persons.” One becomes further alarmed at such a requirement when reading John’s criteria for a saving faith:“Yahushua did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Yahushua is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name”(20:30, 31). Nothing here about the necessity of believing that Yahushua is in fact God, the Eternal One. No hint here of the Trinitarian title,“God the Son.” It is all a straightforward requirement to believe Yahushua is the Messiah, the Anointed One, the promised Messiah of Israel, and that he is truly God’s own Son.
In light of such facts, one must seriously ask what Paul meant, in saying that Yahushua was “in the form of God.” First of all, we note that he is talking about “Messiah Yahushua,” the historical figure who had been born and later had been “anointed” by the Holy Spirit at his immersion, so becoming “the Messiah” or “Anointed One”(Acts 10:38). Trinitarianism assumes that Paul is talking about what Yahushua was before his “Incarnation”— that is, during his supposed pre-existence as God in heaven before he was born. Paul gives no hint here, however, as he specifies the historical person Messsiah Yahushua, that he has any such notion in mind. This interpretation can only be in the minds of those who have already decided that Yahushua pre-existed as a person, either as a divine member of the Trinity, or as an angelic being — the Arian view.

Continued on next post.
MATT13WEEDHACKER

Wellington, New Zealand

#10 Dec 31, 2012
Genesis 32:6-7 LXX:

Who is being “...WORSHIPPED...” here?

Genesis 32:7 LXX: Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )= same Greek word as Hebrews 1:6 being used in the Septuagint.

Who is being “...WORSHIPPED...” by which: Gk.,( KURIE )“...LORD...” in these two verses?

Is it the "...LORD..." Jehovah that is worshipping someone?

Can you answer the question Tri{3}nitarians?
MATT13WEEDHACKER

Wellington, New Zealand

#11 Dec 31, 2012
TYPO CORRECTION:

CHAPTER 23 not 32 sorry.

Genesis 23:6-7 LXX:

Who is being “...WORSHIPPED...” here?

Genesis 23:7 LXX: Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )= same Greek word as Hebrews 1:6 being used in the Septuagint.

Who is being “...WORSHIPPED...” by which: Gk.,( KURIE )“...LORD...” in these two verses?

Is it the "...LORD..." Jehovah that is worshipping someone?

Can you answer the question Tri{3}nitarians?
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#12 Dec 31, 2012
No, the one who was “in the form of God” is the Man called “Messiah Yahushua,” and Paul is describing what was true of that Man while he was on the earth! But what does Paul mean by this phrase? Trinitarian commentators often interpret the Greek word morphe in light of some of its usage in classical Greek literature, that is, from the period five or six centuries earlier. That usage could imply “what is essential and permanent.” But the New Testament is not written in “classical Greek,” but rather in what is called Koine Greek, the popular language of Paul’s day. From many Koine manuscripts discovered by archaeologists and dating from the first century, we know that some terms had acquired new meanings. One of those terms was morphe, usually translated “form.” From Professor of Greek at Moody Bible Institute, Kenneth S. Wuest, himself a Trinitarian, we learn that in Koine Greek the word morphe had come to refer to “a station in life, a position one holds, one’s rank. And that is an approximation of morphe in this context [Philippians 2]”(The Practical Use of the Greek New Testament, p. 84).

How can we be sure that morphe in Philippians 2:6 means “station in life [status], rank, position,” and not “inherent nature,” as some translators or commentators would interpret the Greek word (see NIV on Philippians 2:6, for example)? Here we appeal to the immediate context to help us understand how Paul is using the word. In verse 7 he says that Messiah took the “form,” the morphe, of a servant — literally, of a slave. What does this mean? Does morphe suggest that a servant has some kind of “inherent nature” that would constitute him a slave, or does it not rather imply that servanthood is, per se, a matter of “status, rank, or position”? One’s position as a servant is either a matter of choice or a matter of circumstances. We cannot see, therefore, that the context supports any other meaning for morphe than that which deals with one’s rank or status. Messiah’s status as God is contrasted with His status as a servant. To translate or to understand morphe as “inherent nature” in Philippians 2, then, clearly does not fit the way it is used in this context.

What does all of this imply? It suggests that Messiah as a Man on earth was functioning in the status, rank, or position of God. Amazing thought! But there had been a famous historical precedent for this. When God called Moses to be his agent to bring Israel out of Egypt, he told him,“See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet”(Exo. 7:1). The Hebrew text is even more startling, because the word “like” is not there at all. Rather, God declares to Moses,“I have given you [to be] Elohim to Pharaoh.” Earlier, God had said that Moses would be “Elohim” to Aaron (4:16). This means that Moses functioned in some ways as though he were God on earth; he was the appointed leader to act for God and as possessing the authority God had conferred on him by designating him to bear YHWH's own title, Elohim! This is similar to the character or role of an ambassador or other diplomat who has received “plenipotentiary” authority to act on behalf of the government he represents, and whose decisions and transactions are regarded as equal or identical to those of the sovereign state which has sent him.

Continued on next post.
MATT13WEEDHACKER

Wellington, New Zealand

#13 Dec 31, 2012
Ruth 2:10-13 LXX:

Ruth 2:10 LXX: Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )= same Greek word as Hebrews 1:6 being used in the Septuagint.

Which Gk.,( KURIE )“...LORD...” verse 13, is being:

Ruth 2:10 LXX: Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )“...WORSHIPPED...”

Here?

Is it the "...LORD..." Jehovah that is being worshipped?

Can you answer the question Tri{3}nitarians?
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#14 Dec 31, 2012
We may ask, then, how did Yahushua function in the status of God during his earthly ministry? Do the four Gospels portray his activities in such a way as to suggest that he was doing what the Father himself would have been doing, had God been present visibly and personally to carry out the ministry that his Son in fact fulfilled? Does the record show that on earth Messiah was exercising prerogatives that really belong to God himself? We do not have to go far to find the answer to these questions. Very early in Messiah’s ministry the question arose,“Who can forgive sins but God alone?”(Mark 2:7). Yahushua had just said to a paralyzed man,“Son, your sins are forgiven.” The teachers of the law who heard him say these words accused him of blasphemy. Yahushua replied,“Which is easier: to say to the paralytic,‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say,‘Get up, take your mat and walk’?” Then he added the crucial words,“But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins ....”(2:10). The scribes were correct in understanding that the ultimate authority to forgive men’s sins rests with God. But they needed to understand even further that God had delegated his Son with that authority to act in God’s stead and in His NAME! In this act of forgiveness, then, Messiah was functioning in the morphe — the status — of God, who had sent him.

Further evidence of Yahushuas’ status as God on earth is seen in John 5:21:“For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.” The power to resurrect the dead is in the Father’s hands, and He manifested that power gloriously when He raised His Son from death to immortality (Acts 17:30, 31; Rom. 6:9; 8:11). But while Messiah was on the earth, he himself raised several from death — the most famous case being that of his friend Lazarus. So shocking was this to Messiah’s enemies that they plotted to kill the risen Lazarus as well as the One who had raised him!(John 12:9-11) Again, Messiah was acting in God’s stead when he raised the dead and showed himself to be in the morphe of God. He will fulfill this role again someday,“for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out.” The voice they will hear, to awaken them, is “the voice of the Son of God”(John 5:25-29).

A third evidence of Messiah’s status as God is revealed in John 5:22, 23:“Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.” Paul told the Athenians that someday God would judge the world with justice “by the man He has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead”(Acts 17:31). God is the Judge of the universe, one who is both just in His judicial sentences and yet able to be the “justifier of him who has faith in Yahushua”(Rom. 3:26). But again, Paul reveals that “God will judge men’s secrets through Yahushua Messiah”(Rom. 2:16). Such texts provide evidence that the White Throne Judgment described in Revelation 20:11. will be presided over by Messiah, who will be seated on the throne of judgment.[The Greek text does not have “God” in verse 12, but “the throne”— contrary to the reading in KJV.]

Continued on next post.
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#15 Dec 31, 2012
Equality with God

Messiah “did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.” In what sense was Messiah “equal” with God? We have already seen that Paul is saying that while on earth Yahushua was “in the status of God.” We have also considered what were clearly some of the implications of this divine status: his authority to forgive sin, to raise the dead, and to judge mankind. To this may be added his command of the elements, to make even the winds and the sea obey him.(Matt. 8:23-27) This status made it possible for Paul to declare him “equal with God” in the sense that such equality was a matter of delegated authority from God Himself. Equality, be it noted, is not the same as identity. Paul is not saying that Messiah was identical with God. That would be to provide evidence for either Trinitarianism or modalistic monarchianism (also called Sabellianism — the doctrine that God is simply one person or one being, but one who may be viewed as Father or Son or Holy Spirit). A helpful illustration of the difference between equality and identity may be found in the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, the vice-president becomes equal to the president when the latter becomes incapacitated. The vice-president is then authorized to fulfill all the duties and responsibilities of the presidency. In this capacity he is equal to the president, but not identical with him.

The Greek text of Philippians 2:6 shows that Messiah recognized his equality with God but that he did not consider this God-given equality a harpagmos. KJV translates this word as “robbery.” The word can imply something that is snatched or taken by force. The Arndt-Gingrich lexicon says it can also mean a “prize” or a “windfall” in Koine usage. If Paul is using it in the latter sense, he implies that Messiah did not have any kind of presumptuous attitude as he viewed his equality with God, nor did he seek to take advantage of it, or exploit it, for his own purposes. Rather, he took the status of a slave, seeking only to serve his God and the human race that he had come to save.

Continued on next post.
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#16 Dec 31, 2012
He Emptied Himself

The verb “empty” is the Greek kenoo, from which some Trinitarians have developed a doctrine called the “kenosis theory.” According to this doctrine, the “pre-existent Messiah” divested himself of the manifestation of some of his attributes of deity in order to become man. Without going into the various aspects of this theory and the disagreements even among those who profess it, we may say that all of them use the term “kenosis” to support the idea of Messiah’s personal preexistence. KJV ignores such ideas by translating that he “made himself of no reputation,” an obvious reference to the period of his human lifetime and ministry. We have already seen that Paul is talking about the historical man Messiah Yaahushua, not about a person who was later to become Messiah Yahushua! It is therefore this historical person who “emptied” himself. In such a setting, the word suggests that Messiah put away any temptation for self-aggrandizement or to exalt himself in any way. The queen of Sheba was “emptied” of her pride when she saw the magnificence of Solomon’s court. There was “no more spirit in her”!(1 Kings 10:1-13). Likewise, Messiah’s “self-emptying” left within him no room for pride, arrogance, or any plans being made without total subjection to the will of God.(Heb. 10:7-10; Psa. 40:7-9)

Messiah’s “self-emptying” may be seen as part and parcel of his having taken the status of a servant and of his having come into existence in human likeness.“Having taken” is from the aorist participle labon, and “having come into existence” from the aorist participle genomenos. Such aorist participles often denote a time prior to the action of the main verb. This would support the view that his “self-emptying”(the main verb) occurred after he was born, not before.“Kenosis theories,” therefore, can be considered simply philosophical speculations that can have no basis in the present text. As such, they would be an example of “eisegesis”(reading into the text), not exegesis.

Continued on next post.
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#17 Dec 31, 2012
In Appearance as a Man

Moulton and Milligan’s lexicon sees the word schema, here translated “appearance,” as implying “external bearing” or “fashion.” One is tempted to translate that Messiah was found to be “in the human scheme of things” or “in the human condition.” He was totally human, apart from sin. He looked to be what he was — a man. Such descriptions, being inspired of God, forbid any kind of Gnostic or Docetist teaching that Messiah only “appeared” to be a flesh-and-blood human being while being in fact “purely spirit.” In their view anything material was, ipso facto, evil. So Messiah could not have a material body. He only “appeared” to have one, said the Docetists. Pastor C. T. Russell used a similar kind of “sleight of hand” when he taught that Yahushua had no physical body after his resurrection. He simply “materialized” a temporary body to show to his disciples — a teaching still propagated by those called Jehovah’s Witnesses as well as by others from the Russellite tradition.



He Humbled Himself

Paul now goes on to declare how far Messiah went in subjecting himself to his Father, who had placed him in the status of God to carry out His earthly ministry and had delegated him to exercise equality with God according to that status.“He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death.” God’s plan, as foretold by Isaiah, was to lay upon his Son “the iniquity of us all”(53:6), to crush him and to cause him to suffer, and to make his life a guilt-offering (v.10). Peter says that Yahushua was delivered unto death by God’s “predetermined plan and foreknowledge”(Acts 2:23). And yet Yahushua willingly submitted himself to this plan, in loving obedience to his Father.“The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord”(John 10:17, 18). Any doctrine of the atonement must take into account this judicial infliction of death upon Messiah by his Father, so that God the Judge could also act justly in being the “justifier” of those who belong to Messiah.(Rom. 3:26 KJV)

Messiah’s willing obedience “to the point of death” is made even more amazing by the fact that his death was carried out by one of the most painful and humiliating methods available — that of crucifixion! Paul stresses this shocking truth by using the word “even.” Of all the ways that one might die, death on a cross is the most horrible he can imagine — and at the same time the kind that most reveals Messiah’s total submission to the will of God! As a Roman citizen, Paul realized that the government reserved death by crucifixion for the worst criminals, or else for the persons she most despised — the ones she viewed as avowed enemies of her authority to rule the world.

Continued on next post.

“Delivering the Gospel”

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#18 Dec 31, 2012
MATT13WEEDHACKER wrote:
Genesis 23:7 LXX: Gk.,( PROSKUNESATOOSAN )= same Greek word as Hebrews 1:6 being used in the Septuagint.
What word is being used in the Septuagint at Gen.22:5 for "worship?"
HaShomer

Bonita Springs, FL

#19 Dec 31, 2012
God Highly Exalted Him

From this lowest point of humiliation Messiah was elevated to the highest pinnacle of authority in the universe, excepting that of God Himself. Yahushua as Lord is exalted “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every NAME that is NAMED, not only in this age, but also in the one to come”(Eph. 1:21 NASB). His present position is such that all God’s angels must worship him as being “much superior to them”; he has inherited a name superior to theirs (Heb. 1:4-6). This name is “the NAME above every NAME.” One could say that God has given to His Son His own name (Yahu is Salvation), just as human fathers do in naming sons after themselves. Certainly God’s name YHWH is applied to Messiah in such prophecies as Jeremiah 23:6 —“This is his NAME by which he will be called, the LORD (YHWH)our righteousness [literally, YHWH-tzidkenu].” Zechariah 14:3, 4 speaks of the day when “the feet of YHWH” will stand on the Mount of Olives when he fights against the nations making war on Jerusalem. It appears that this refers to Messiah himself, coming in his Father’s NAME, to “strike down the nations” and to “tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty”(Rev. 19:15). It is God’s exalted Son, despised and rejected of men, who will appear once more on earth to be glorified in the same place where he was humiliated! In the presence of Yahushua, King of kings and Lord of lords, every knee must bow — whether angelic, demonic, or human. Every tongue must then confess that Messiah Yahushua is lord of all, by the express command of God and to the glory of God, the Father who so exalted his Son!

HalleluYah!!!
Unknown

Anonymous Proxy

#20 Dec 31, 2012
J F Rutherford wrote:
This is cult logic.
As we all know from scripture, Phil 2:6-8 says that Christ was “existing in God’s form” before he became a man, and willingly “emptied (lowered) himself” to become a man and “humbled HIMSELF” in order to make himself subject to the Father.
Since the status changed at birth, it's no surprise that Angels were told to worship Jesus.
BTW, Jesus is God and you cannot receive salvation unless you pray to Jesus.
Your objecting to my argument attempts to demonstrate that a change in status somehow necessitates the reaffirmation that the Son must be worshipped. The problem with your objection is that within your own theology the Son never ceased to be God at His incarnation, so why would the angelic host need to be re-commanded to worship God. Nothing at all has changed with the statues of the Son in regards to Him being God. Since the angels worship God and the Son is God by definition the Son must be worshipped. It still makes no sense for God to command the angels to worship the Son even with the incarnation taking place since He is still by definition God.

Your objection has failed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What do you really think of the NWT? 9 min The Outlaw Josey ... 6
JW's say that December 25th is a wrong date 20 min Boni 389
How to Witness to a Jehovah's Witness Ray Comfo... 29 min Snorkel 395
Praise Jehovah (Jul '13) 1 hr Boni 1,843
What is the trinity? (Apr '13) 1 hr Boni 18,092
Things you don't miss when you leave 1 hr Maravilla 24
EX-Jehovah's Witnesses or EX- Watchtower follow... (Jun '13) 1 hr Maravilla 200
Disfellowshipping Done Correctly. HOW? 2 hr FutureMan 63
Mental Illness Of Topix 2 hr Jace 75
YES-Jesus WAS once known as Michael 2 hr BetheljudgmentDan... 1,810
Will Becoming a JW Lead to Happiness? 2 hr little lamb 308
More from around the web